View Full Version : AfterAll Those Beastly Things Said About Canada...
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 14:40
... I am truly sorry. Canada, huzzar (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7954923.stm)!
Canada has the dumbest secret service on the planet.
This means that if Galloway tries to enter illegaly he will be tasered to death by the Mounties (Another ongoing security saga)
Of course publicity like this you cannot buy. Galloway is going to be on CBC news for an extended interview this evening and on the Sunday chat shows. (that's my guess).
I remember when he visited the US Senate and lectured them on their war crimes - brilliant and lots of fun.
This should brighten us all up in these dour and forbidding times
There is no truth in it. Galloway has never been to Canada, he has no intention of going to Canada, he doesn't know what Canada looks like and neither has anyone on his behalf. ;)
I sense there's a joke striving to get out there.
But just for the record, Galloway was in Canada in November 2006.
Canada bans British MP, Bitain bans Dutch MP, now if only the Dutch would ban a Canadian MP it would tie any loose ends up.
A new word to me but INFANDOUS as used by some Canadian Minister to describe George Galloway (he who made his fortune stealing from Save the Children Fund) - sounds about right for this odious parasite.
George Galloway should be booted out of every country he sets foot in!!![lol]
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 20:04
Well, he hasn't been to Iraq since March 2003. I have no idea.
My immediate reaction to this was along the lines of a certain comment in Team America, except "America" was replaced by "Canada".
Canada, like any country, is perfectly within her rights to ban entry to whomsoever she chooses. From the Canadian Foreign Ministry:
We’re going to uphold the law, not give special treatment to this infamous street-corner Cromwell who actually brags about giving ‘financial support’ to Hamas, a terrorist organisation banned in Canada,” he said. “I’m sure Galloway has a large Rolodex of friends in regimes elsewhere in the world willing to roll out the red carpet for him. Canada, however, won’t be one of them. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/20/george-galloway-banned-canada)Hoora!
Make no mistake, he refers to as a "resistance" individuals who are terrorizing and killing Afghan civilians and security forces, as well as Canadian troops there on a U.N. mandated mission.
Canada has the dumbest secret service on the planet.
I doubt it would have missed this (http://%5BURL%5Dhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003/apr/27/uk.iraq%5B/URL%5D):
Labour MP George Galloway acted as the secret ‘emissary’ for a British-based Islamic dissident who purchased a satellite phone supplied to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
The phone was used by Osama bin Laden and his associates to plan the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Tanzania and Kenya
I remember when he visited the US Senate and lectured them on their war crimes - brilliant and lots of fun.
As I recall he called them financially dubious and in thrall to foreign dictators. Bit rich coming from him. At least he didn't accuse them of embezzling charity funds, as that would have been too much.
He hasn't been back to America. I'm sure it has nothing to do with potential perjury charges.
A new word to me but INFANDOUS as used by some Canadian Minister to describe George Galloway (he who made his fortune stealing from Save the Children Fund) - sounds about right for this odious parasite.
That's potentially libellous. Save the Children? I'm not aware of that. He should, however, explain where missing monies went from the Mariam Appeal, and why his expenses were as much, if not greater, than all the other staff's.
Also, when, if ever, he was present at an anti-Saddam protest in the 1980s.
I say it again, GEORGE GALLOWAY MADE HIS FORTUNE STEALING FROM SAVE THE CHILDREN FUND. The Mariam Appeal was a later till to be dipped.
I eagerly await the communication from his legal advisers
I say it again, GEORGE GALLOWAY MADE HIS FORTUNE STEALING FROM SAVE THE CHILDREN FUND. The Mariam Appeal was a later till to be dipped.
I eagerly await the communication from his legal advisers
I'm sorry but I don't believe that.
I think Galloway should be admitted to Canada. Heck, I even believe Percy should be allowed in. (It's a big country!)
Dave, as for the Bin Laden phone caper, I suspect that's a set-up. Like the explosive cigars the CIA used to send to Castro.
As for CSIS, their main claim to fame is handing Canadian citizens over to Syria so they can be tortured "off the books."
ANd as for the Women's collective who have been named as pro-Hamas terrorists - these are feminists who run a small book store on the University of Toronto campus. And several of them are Jewish!
What has happened is that the usual amount of feuding between the Jewish Defence League, its allies and the various Arab/socialist groups in Toronto is spilling over into mainstream politics.
Why should this be so, now?
Well, the Conservative federal government is in a minority and they are under a great deal of pressure because of the current economic difficulties.
Compounding their problem is the fact that they haven't won a single seat in the city of Toronto in recent memory. So they are forced out into the suburban diaspora and the priairie west (where people are more conservative) In that context, Kicking Galloway in the Ass will win a few voters. (Maybe)
!
In conclusion I would say that the federal government mishandled this. And the outcome?
Wait and see!
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 21:14
Davie, I assume you have an "allegedly" hidden in the micro-dot on the I!
Now, out of genuine interest, can you link to reports regarding Save the Children? I am genuinely not aware of those, but as long as doubts are raised, it should be perfectly permissible to discuss them. I do think you are confusing it with the Mariam Appeal which was ostensibly set-up to raise funds for Iraqi children. Subsequently, it was argued not to be subject to the Charity Commission because, despite wearing the clothing of a charity, it was registered as a political campaign in Scotland.
And just what all that money was which went through the bank account of Galloway's then wife.
I think Galloway should be admitted to Canada.
He is not being prevented from corresponding with individuals in Canada or having his views broadcast there. Freedom of speech is not a guarantee of venue.
Dave, as for the Bin Laden phone caper, I suspect that's a set-up.Actually, it was me who mentioned that. So, why has he not sued? He's quick in other circumstances.
What has happened is that the usual amount of feuding between the Jewish Defence League, its allies and the various Arab/socialist groups in Toronto is spilling over into mainstream politics.Whatever happened to rule of law? Wilders was banned from this country after, I firmly believe, the convicted dangerous-driver Lord Ahmed vowed that "ten thousand angry Muslims" would descend on Parliament. He should have been investigated by the Police for this, but instead his threat of civil disorder was heeded. This seems to be your reasoning here as well.
I had to break it to you, Rich, but Western streets over the past three months (and more) have become extremely un-friendly to Jews and distressing to other rational observers as a regional conflict was imported. Galloway has been a major instigation in the events I describe (no qualifications attached, note).
ANd as for the Women's collective who have been named as pro-Hamas terrorists - these are feminists who run a small book store on the University of Toronto campus. And several of them are Jewish!
I don't think anyone here has claimed that Galloway is individually an antisemite, even though he did potentially libel (http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3531) a Jewish Police called Dreyfus. When he visited the Middle East in the 1970s, Galloway actively sought out P.L.O. gunmen for a strange photo-shoot. An acquaintence also recollects his dreaming of the time when he'd wade across the River Jordan with an AK-47. In later years, he genuflected in front of Saddam Hussein and his son who was known to be a multiple rapist.
But, antisemitic? No.
Hamas' charter is indisputably antisemitic in tone and the organization has been banned in Canada. During the recent Children's Crusade to Gaza, Galloway promised to hand (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnxPRFZT8Aw&feature=player_embedded) tens of thousands of pounds worth of equipment and donations to the Hamas leadership.
What's wrong? The U.N. warehouses been locked (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7875171.stm)?
MM you wrote:
I had to break it to you, Rich, but Western streets over the past three months (and more) have become extremely un-friendly to Jews and distressing to other rational observers as a regional conflict was imported. Galloway has been a major instigation in the events I describe (no qualifications attached, note).
It takes two to tangle, MM. I have Jewish friends and Arab friends and I dont talk politics with them. Certainly things are heating up more than somewhat. I would be surprised if they didn't because of Israel's incursion into Gaza. That was a horror and an obscenity. Now let's not get into the politics of the last atrocity, instead let's try and prevent the next.
Does George Galloway have a role to play in this process? I would think not. But he';s not the devil incarnate!
The Save the Children Fund was Galloway's meal ticket long before he joined the political gravy train - although I can see nothing on Google to quantify this the sums involved were at least in the same ball park as the £800K or more unaccounted for in the Mariam Appeal scam.
There will be someone around the .org of my age group who will no doubt remember the general details.
There will be someone around the .org of my age group who will no doubt remember the general details.
What a surprise, apart from you there's another 106 year old on here! [lol]
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 22:01
I would be surprised if they didn't because of Israel's incursion into Gaza. Oh, yes, I understand that. Just that I understand why similar outrage never was expressed whilst Hamas was firing rockets and mortars into southern Israel or, after the start of Cast Lead, started using white-phosphorous as anti-personnel weapons against residential targets, or when Hamas - instead of fighting like men - used 14 year old boys as cannon fodder or set-up qassam units in residential areas, or started 'requisitioning' U.N. supplies 'cos it was going to go to their political rivals.
That was a horror and an obscenity.No, it was a war which was not unusual in what goes on in war (and certainly better than many events which took place, beyond concern, in Sri Lanka or Uganda at the same time).
But, yes, I understand why some people prefer to single out Israel. Don't find it understandable, though.
Now let's not get into the politics of the last atrocity, instead let's try and prevent the next.A good way would be for Hamas to stop tweaking the nose of a vastly more powerful military which would be happy to leave it alone otherwise; or for the people like Galloway not to import such regional conflicts onto Western streets.
Does George Galloway have a role to play in this process? I would think not. So he did not announced his intention to glorify Hezbollah and glorify Nasrullah during the 2006 War?
He is not being prevented from corresponding with individuals in Canada or having his views broadcast there. Freedom of speech is not a guarantee of venue.
The only thing I know about modern Canada is from the Crime channel on Sky. I could probably hack it for a couple of weeks holiday but that would be it.
George Galloways on the radio tonight at 10 in his weekly show. Lasts for 3 hours and some of it is classic. Talk sport MW 1053. I listen in now and again but you can get sick of him. Hes only half right and he canna see it.
I should have said its channel 0108 on Sky
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 22:21
He'd better be careful what he says. During the investigation into the the de Menezes shooting, he declared that the Met had deliberately assassinated de Menezes... pause... angry shout to his producer, why can't I say it?
Because it's slander, Dod.
My only concern about Gabbaway is that one day he may say something intelligent and worth listening to.
The only problem I have with that is I don’t believe in miracles and I don’t expect to live until I’m two hundred.
I must admit one thing, he’s a very good stand-up comedian, he’s worth a laugh every time he opens his mouth.
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 22:41
The Save the Children Fund was Galloway's meal ticket long before he joined the political gravy train - although I can see nothing on Google to quantify this the sums involved were at least in the same ball park as the £800K or more unaccounted for in the Mariam Appeal scam.
There will be someone around the .org of my age group who will no doubt remember the general details.
I'm not necessarily doubting you, Davie. It's true that he appears to attract allegations of financial impropriety wherever he goes. So, if he were involved with Save the Children, I would not be surprised if doubts were raised about his conduct.
However, he'd have been a minor figure in it, unlike the Mariam Appeal in which he was a big cheese and with access to all the records as well as, I assume as with any office, paper shredders.
Israel uses white phosphorous shells all the time. Israel kills women and children indiscriminately, oops, Hamas put them in the way, hence forcing the Israeli military to kill them. Palestine can not fight a conventional war against Israel because Palestine have qassam rockets at their disposal, Israel has the best military equipment that money can buy?[lol]
Israel will leave Palestine alone if Hamas stop tweaking their noses, chortle, chortle. Viva Palestina........
Melancholy Man
20-Mar-09, 22:59
Israel uses white phosphorous shells all the time.
White phosphorous is approved as an incendiary device, and has been used for 93 years. I wouldn't mind seeing it banned, but if you believe Israeli forces have deployed it as anti-personnel weapons or indiscriminately where civilians could be reasonable be said to have been put at unnecessary risk, provide documented evidence.
The International Committee of the Red Cross won't do, by the way. The sort of stuff which shows Hamas to have been firing it into residential areas where there are no military targets, for instance.
Israel kills women and children indiscriminately,
Substantiate that or withdraw it.
oops, Hamas put them in the way,
That's demonstrably true.
hence forcing the Israeli military to kill them. [lol]
Is this a snuff movie script? Come back when you've developed similar outrage at the tens of thousands of residents of southern Israel who've lived under daily fear of rocket attack... on second thoughts... don't. Develop a non-malicious concern for both.
Israel will leave Palestine alone if Hamas stop tweaking their noses, chortle, chortle.
Have I missed the parallel operation in the West Bank? No, it's just the territorty from which attacks are coming daily.
Viva Palestina........
Jordan's doing very well with 80% of the territory of Palestine. The Administered Territories could have achieved effective independence 15 years ago had that tea-leaf Arafat not walked out of negotiations (or, at the very least, suggested an alternative to the scheme he rejection).
White phosphorous is approved as an incendiary device, and has been used for 93 years. I wouldn't mind seeing it banned, but if you believe Israeli forces have deployed it as anti-personnel weapons or indiscriminately where civilians could be reasonable be said to have been put at unnecessary risk, provide documented evidence.Who am I, your researcher? If you are unaware or just disbelieve that it happens then research it.
The International Committee of the Red Cross won't do, by the way. The sort of stuff which shows Hamas to have been firing it into residential areas where there are no military targets, for instance.
Tell me joking, please?
Substantiate that or withdraw it.The Israeli military do kill women and children, why would I need to substantiate it? Research it yourself or withdraw.
That's demonstrably true.I thought you implied that Israel's military didn't kill women and children, you asked me to substantiate?:eek:
Is this a snuff movie script? Come back when you've developed similar outrage at the tens of thousands of residents of southern Israel who've lived under daily fear of rocket attack... on second thoughts... don't. Develop a non-malicious concern for both.I wouldn't know. I thought snuuff movies were an urban legend?
I have similar outrage about defenceless Israelis being killed, can you state the same about the Palestinians?
Jordan's doing very well with 80% of the territory of Palestine. The Administered Territories could have achieved effective independence 15 years ago had that tea-leaf Arafat not walked out of negotiations (or, at the very least, suggested an alternative to the scheme he rejection).It's an open prison, the sooner you realise that the better.
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 00:09
Who am I, your researcher? If you are unaware or just disbelieve that it happens then research it.You make a claim, you provide evidence.
Tell me joking, please?Whom am I, your researcher?
The Israeli military do kill women and children, why would I need to substantiate it?Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! I think you deep-fry kittens, why would I need to substantiate it?
I thought you implied that Israel's military didn't kill women and children, you asked me to substantiate?You said kills *indiscriminately*. This is how argument works, you remain consistent or past statements come back to haunt you!
I wouldn't know. I thought snuuff movies were an urban legend?For someone who believes he can change reality simply by changing/omitting a word you do a pretty dismal job of parsing others' sentences. I *asked* if this were a snuff movie; not declared them to be real.
Snuff movies were said to be enactments of extreme physical pain and/or death, rather like presenting images of gruesome suffering in a (conventional) conflict.
I have similar outrage about defenceless Israelis being killed,The snag being you have not expressed any, with your outrage expressed entirely in terms of what Israeli forces may or may not be inflicting on Palestinian Arabs. In fact, this is the first time you've referred to individual Israelis and not a nefarious entity called "Israel". Basically, your rhetoric has been to be individualize the Palestinian Arabs, all innocent victims of a ferocious onslaught, and de-humanize Israelis.
can you state the same about the Palestinians?Ah, always a sure sign that the silly Leninist is about to cut-and-run when he starts telling others what they are or are not thinking!
It's an open prison,Note, no attempted refutation of the claims I made because you can't. Instead, you attempt to change the parameters of the discussion and simply ignored out of existence anything which doesn't fit your predetermined narrative .
Do I suppose you're going to substantiate that claim?
the sooner you realise that the better. What a mere Internet commenter such as me does or does not realize has absolutely no effect on anything other than this squiggy, fury, purring blob on his lap. You're getting what's going on inside your head mixed-up with international diplomacy and cosmic games of chess.
You make a claim, you provide evidence.
Whom am I, your researcher?I don't need to, live with it.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! I think you deep-fry kittens, why would I need to substantiate it?I do deep fry kittens for that I am ashamed, is Israel as a whole ashamed of murdering women and children?
You said kills *indiscriminately*. This is how argument works, you remain consistent or past statements come back to haunt you!Try practicing what you preach.;)
For someone who believes he can change reality simply by changing/omitting a word you do a pretty dismal job of parsing others' sentences. I *asked* if this were a snuff movie; not declared them to be real.I did a great job of parsing your sentencebut, by the way, you asked, "Is this a snuff movie?"
Snuff movies were said to be enactments of extreme physical pain and/or death, rather like presenting images of gruesome suffering in a (conventional) conflict.Enactments?[lol]
The snag being you have not expressed any, with your outrage expressed entirely in terms of what Israeli forces may or may not be inflicting on Palestinian Arabs. In fact, this is the first time you've referred to individual Israelis and not a nefarious entity called "Israel". Basically, your rhetoric has been to be individualize the Palestinian Arabs, all innocent victims of a ferocious onslaught, and de-humanize Israelis.Bollocks.
Ah, always a sure sign that the silly Leninist is about to cut-and-run when he starts telling others what they are or are not thinking!You can think what you like, it's your perogative but it doesn't make you right.
Note, no attempted refutation of the claims I made because you can't. Instead, you attempt to change the parameters of the discussion and simply ignored out of existence anything which doesn't fit your predetermined narrative .You claim that Hammas uses white phosphorous with all that entails but you neglect to inform that Israel's military does the same albeit on a much larger scale.
What a mere Internet commenter such as me does or does not realize has absolutely no effect on anything other than this squiggy, fury, purring blob on his lap. You're getting what's going on inside your head mixed-up with international diplomacy and cosmic games of chess.You are anything but a "mere internet commentator", you are a propagandist. I prefer cosmic snooker, BTW.
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 02:33
I don't need to, live with it.How old are you?
I do deep fry kittens for that I am ashamed,How old are you?
is Israel as a whole ashamed of murdering women and children?
Actually, this is quite sinister. As a whole? Even new-born babies? Is the blood of the Gazans on their heads? Add to that still your reluctance to speak of Palestinian Arabs in the same terms (is Palestine, as a whole, ashamed of trying to and murdering women and children?).
Also, from eliding the "indiscriminate" part and not thinking anyone'd notice, you've now replaced killing - which is a statement of fact - with "murdering" - which has a specific meaning in law. Substantiate this charge.
Try practicing what you preach. ;)Again, post-modern hypocrisy in which any scenario or behaviour amongst others can be imputed simply by saying so. This ain't 1968 no more! Dream on, I've sneezed bigger than you!
I did a great job of parsing your sentencebut,So you say.
by the way, you asked, "Is this a snuff movie?"Maybe not. Is this Bogota? Oh, no! I've just mistaken Caithness for Colombia!
Enactments?Yes, enactments. They may have been said to involve actual infliction of pain or death, but they weren't really murderous attacks by burglars or jealous lovers or whatever. It was to have been preformed by actors. Just as no Palestinian Arab has been harmed in the production of this thread - it's all been enacted on your keyboard.
Goodness knows how you read a novel if you cannot grasp Literary Theory 101.
Bollocks.Lalalala, I can't hear you! Lalalala, post-modern pretending things don't exist! What did George Orwell say about liberty?
You can think what you like, it's your perogative but it doesn't make you right.You haven't thought that one through, have you?
You claim that Hammas uses white phosphorous with all that entails but you neglect to inform that Israel's military does the same albeit on a much larger scale.Can you not read? I have implicitly stated that Israeli forces do use white phosphorous, and explicitly stated I find it a potentially highly unpleasant substance.
Once more, white phosphorous has been in use since 1916, and more or less every military in the world uses it to illuminate the battlefield or create a smokescreen (an alternative being to open up with all barrels against anything and anyone in the vicinity). The preoccupation with it does not have legs, and observers realize it.
You may have wondered why I stated that the I.C.R.C. would not provide evidence of illegal use. The reason is that it has declared (http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/weapons-interview-170109?OpenDocument&style=custo_print) it not to have been illegal/improper.
Yet, you are others are still pushing the line it was abhorrent. You remind me of a Japanese soldier, 20 years after wars-end, still unable to accept defeat.
The allegations of indiscriminate use are based on the use of about 200 shells, 20 of which were fired by one man whose I could find out if I were so inclined (I.D.F. monitoring is that detailed). Say the stockpiles were 20,000 shells (it's probably more), this is a total 1% of it although each individual discharge was << 1%
Hamas will have many times fewer, almost certainly in the dozens of crude unstable pieces of ordnance. It is known to have fired at least one shell at non-military targets in Eshkol on 14 January: that is, >> 1%. So, "in scale", Hamas' use has been greater.
See? Scale needs to take into account both what is being measured and what the source quantity is.
You are anything but a "mere internet commentator",Much as I'm sure Fernie et al. would like to think this site is a hub of international attention, I am only a mere commentator with a few hundred, if that, readers.
you are a propogandist.This coming from the commentator who has accused an entire country, populated by individuals all sematically associated with her foul deeds, of "murdering women and children" and not caring for the Palestinian Arab civilians in general.
You couldn't make it up. But you just have.
How old are you?
How old are you?About as old as you were when you posed the scenario
Actually, this is quite sinister. As a whole? Even new-born babies? Is the blood of the Gazans on their heads? Add to that still your reluctance to speak of Palestinian Arabs in the same terms (is Palestine, as a whole, ashamed of trying to and murdering women and children?).Show and tell Mel.
Also, from eliding the "indiscriminate" part and not thinking anyone'd notice, you've now replaced killing - which is a statement of fact - with "murdering" - which has a specific meaning in law. Substantiate this charge.Since when has international "law", meant anything to the Israeli Government, MEL?
Again, post-modern hypocrisy in which any scenario or behaviour amongst others can be imputed simply by saying so. This ain't 1968 no more! Dream on, I've sneezed bigger than you!So you say.[lol] Did you have a big enough Hankey or were you using that to store your ego?
Maybe not. Is this Bogota? Oh, no! I've just mistaken Caithness for Colombia!Stop snorting Columbia's finest then you may sneeze less.
Yes, enactments. They may have been said to involve actual infliction of pain or death, but they weren't really murderous attacks by burglars or jealous lovers or whatever. It was to have been preformed by actors. Just as no Palestinian Arab has been harmed in the production of this thread - it's all been enacted on your keyboard.If you had one iota of understanding what you were on about then I would give you creedence but unfortunately you have none
Goodness knows how you read a novel if you cannot grasp Literary Theory 101. I mangage fine , thanks.
Lalalala, I can't hear you! Lalalala, post-modern pretending things don't exist! What did George Orwell say about liberty?Did he say, "Should I not stick my fingers in my ears whilst repeating, Lalalala"?
You haven't thought that one through, have you?You obviously have but it hasn't sunk in.
Can you not read? I have implicitly stated that Israeli forces do use white phosphorous, and explicitly stated I find it a potentially highly unpleasant substance.I think I can read, hell maybe I can't , please tell me?[lol]
You use Hammas' use of white phosphorous as part of your argument and quite rightly, eventually, distance yourself from any agreement to it's use, but, only after I stated that Israel uses it aswell.
Once more, white phosphorous has been in use since 1916, and more or less every military in the world uses it to illuminate the battlefield or create a smokescreen (an alternative being to open up with all barrels against anything and anyone in the vicinity). The preoccupation with it does not have legs, and observers realize it.
Okay Mel, I agree with you, it isa justifiable to use Willie Pete as long as you are not Palestinian.:roll:
You may have wondered why I stated that the I.C.R.C. would not provide evidence of illegal use. The reason is that it has declared (http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/weapons-interview-170109?OpenDocument&style=custo_print) it not to have been illegal/improper.So let's burn women and children, after all, it is legal.
Yet, you are others are still pushing the line it was abhorrent. You remind me of a Japanese soldier, 20 years after wars-end, still unable to accept defeat.The difference between your Japanese soldier and a Palestinian is that the war is still going onj, "After all these years", to quote Foster and Allen.
The allegations of indiscriminate use are based on the use of about 200 shells, 20 of which were fired by one man whose I could find out if I were so inclined (I.D.F. monitoring is that detailed). Say the stockpiles were 20,000 shells (it's probably more), this is a total 1% of it although each individual discharge was << 1%Lmfao@IDF, read,(terrorist organisation), monitoring.
Hamas will have many times fewer, almost certainly in the dozens of crude unstable pieces of ordnance. It is known to have fired at least one shell at non-military targets in Eshkol on 14 January: that is, >> 1%. So, "in scale", Hamas' use has been greater
See? Scale needs to take into account both what is being measured and what the source quantity is.Bollocks, you know it and I know it, tell the truth.
Much as I'm sure Fernie et al. would like to think this site is a hub of international attention, I am only a mere commentator with a few hundred, if that, readersKeep spouting the hatred, Mel.
This coming from the commentator who has accused an entire country, populated by individuals all sematically associated with her foul deeds, of "murdering women and children" and not caring for the Palestinian Arab civilians in general.No, Mel, I have acused the Israeli Government/Military of murdering innocent women and children, let's not cloud the issue,.
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 11:19
About as old as you were when you posed the scenarioI know what you are, but what am I?
Show and tell Mel.Translation: he's got a point, now I'm going to fold like a pack of cards and start feigning ignorance.
Since when has international "law", meant anything to the Israeli Government, MEL?Tell us which specific legislation Israel is accused of breaching and we can have a meaningful discussion. Until then, all you have is piques of temper from profoundly un-democratic U.N. bodies with an ingrained animus towards Israel of no more value in international jurisprudence than putting wive-beaters in charge of women's refuges.
Stop snorting Columbia's finest then you may sneeze less.A university?
So you say.[lol] Did you have a big enough Hankey or were you using that to store your ego?I made no mention of the size of the other bogeys. Or, do you think that to be bigger than you, summat has to be *really* big? Now, to continue with this mucophagic thread:
If you had one iota of understanding what you were on about then I would give you creedence but unfortunately you have noneAh, all the silly Leninist has left is expressions of intellectual superiority on an Internet forum, so all he can do is call others intellectually sub normal. No actual *explanations* of his argument, because there's no point explaining summat which is not open to criticism, of course.
I mangage fine , thanks.Now it's pride in ignorance. Are there no limits to the depths you'll go?
Did he say, "Should I not stick my fingers in my ears whilst repeating, Lalalala"?No. Try reading a book.
You obviously have but it hasn't sunk in.Try it this way, uou can think what you like {about Israeli forces' conduct}, it's your prerogative but it doesn't make you right.
I think I can read, hell maybe I can't , please tell me?Whom am I, your researcher? You don't even have to open another browser window.
You use Hammas' use of white phosphorous as part of your argument and quite rightly, eventually, distance yourself from any agreement to it's use, but, only after I stated that Israel uses it aswellStill the silly Leninist thinks that his words change reality, and that reality requires his words for its existence. *I* was the first to mentioned that Israeli forces use it so, by your reasoning, I own this argument and can decree anything I wish into and out of existence. You are a bit confused, aren't you?
Okay Mel, I agree with you, it isa justifiable to use Willie Pete as long as you are not PalestinianEh, when did we start talking about Palestinian Arabs? I've been referring to Hamasniks.
So let's burn women and children, after all, it is legal.No, it's illegal (assuming you're referring to the deliberate/reckless use of white phosphrous against residential areas). Which hasn't been demonstrated to have been done by Israeli forces.
The difference between your Japanese soldier and a Palestinian is that the war is still going onj, "After all these years", to quote Foster and Allen.It was still going on for many Asian peasant farmers living near such holdouts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_holdout) well into the 1960s and beyond (http://www.wanpela.com/holdouts/profiles/onoda.html). The potential for bushido was so great, that in 1978, 33 years after the end of war, the Japanese Government launched a formal policy - Operation Cherry Blossom - to locate remaining holdouts.
Lmfao@IDF, read,(terrorist organisation), monitoring.Are you calling the I.D.F. a terrorist organization, or are you just being an idiot?
Bollocks, you know it and I know it, tell the truth.Quite amazing... I've not only given him documented evidence from the I.C.R.C., hardly pro-Zionist, that Israeli forces' use has been within the law (ergo, no deliberate/reckless use against residential areas; in fact, no evidence of civilian casualties at all) but also of Hamasniks' intentional use against non-military targets... and *still* the silly Leninist believes he can continue crying illegality and murderous intent by Israel!
Keep spouting the hatred, Mel.What on earth? Hatred for Bill Fernie??? It cannot be for Palestinian Arabs, 'cos I've been referring only to Hamasniks. Given that you strongly imply that their use of white phosprous against Eshkol was unacceptable, you must be admitting to spouting hatred yerself.
You ain't the most convincing arguer, are you?
No, Mel, I have acused the Israeli Government/Military of murdering innocent women and children,I don't know which is worse. Your stating that Israel "as a whole", i.e. right down to the babies at Rehovot neo-natal unit, should feel responsible or openly denying it and believing you can simply change your words and, therefore, reality.
Now, kindly demonstrate a modicum of intellectual honesty and substantiate the legally-precise charge of "murder".
let's not cloud the issue,Actually, until you blundered in, the issue was of a British M.P. being banned from entering Canada. You have dedicated yourself to excoriating Israel. Funny that.
So here's what the Toronto Star says. I agree with this!
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/606073
I find it amusing, the only thing George Galloway loves and supports is George Galloway. The ban gives him some publicity and he revels in that. Good. It'll make it more difficult for him to get into more trouble elsewhere. See, I have his best interests at heart. :)
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 15:16
Now, Kenney has banned British MP George Galloway from entering Canada, on the spurious grounds that he supports Middle East terrorism.He has been photograph'd handing money to the leader of Hamas which'd previously overseen the theft of U.N. supplies and which is a proscribed terrorist organization in many countries. He supports forces killing Canadian troops (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/606084) on a U.N. mandated mission.
He is not a Canadian citizen. He has no right to enter Canada. Pity the nation which is obliged to accept him... oh, wait...
Expelled from the ruling Labour Party in 2003 for opposing the invasion of Iraq,That's a lie. Half the Labour Party opposed the invasion. Galloway, however, said that the forces killing British troops were "writing their names in the stars" and backed a candidate against the official Labour Party candidate.
That's what the venal barrowboy was expelled.
he now sits in Britain's parliament as the sole member of Respect, an anti-war grouping.No it's not. It's a religio-political and ethno-nationalist political party, dominated by highly conservative Mawdubist Bengalis, more than a few of whom are allged to have been intimiately involved with real war-crimes in the 1971 West Pakistan War.
Galloway *supports* armed insurrection. So even this ridiculous formation is wrong.
It's a clumsy move, designed presumably to bolster the Conservative government's support among voters who ardently back Israel.Creep.
Galloway's apparent crime was to deliver humanitarian aid last week to Gaza's Hamas government,No, his apparent crime is to endorse a proscribed terrorist organization. What is so hard to understand about this? Thousands of people were involved with supplying aid to Gaza (and dozens on that offensive Children's Crusade), but just as only this infandous street-corner Cromwell was expelled from the Labour Party, only he has been barred from entering Canada.
As well, other Western politicians talk to Hamas. Last weekend, another British MP met the organization's top leader.So what? Has that M.P. tried to get into Canada? Any investigations in this country are entirely unrelated to Canadian internal matters.
But the nattily dressed Galloway,Is this journalist looking for a date?
known at home as Gorgeous George, Er, no he's not. He's known as a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah.
is a relentless showboat,Yeah, and just what did the planned speeches in Canada have to do with representing his constituents?
famous in his own country for appearing in a reality television show. Er, no he's not.
He praises Hamas extravagantly,And Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organization. Maybe that's why he was barred from entry.
calling on the West to recognize it as the legitimately elected government of Gaza.Er, no it's not.
When London's Daily Telegraph accused him of taking rake-offs from Saddam Hussein, Galloway famously sued and won.That's not really true. The whole case boiled down to the injudicious absense of the word "allegedly", with the surreal situation of the Telegraph insisting the story wasn't true and Galloway insisting it was true he had received some monies. British libel law is a disgrace, benefitting the gagging of free reporting by dime-store demagogues.
Now, why did he not sue over the Guardian's reports of his buying satellite 'phones subsequently used in the East Africa bombings?
But he's not by any stretch of the imagination a danger to this country. Even Kenney must recognize that. That's it. I am filled with a demented desire to stand outside the Toronto Star's offices, throwing stones and launching fireworks at them whilst calling for violent attacks on their staff abroad. I'm sure I won't be a threat to Canada.
The real reason for Kenney's snit may be that in January Mouammar called him a "professional whore," who supports Israel abroad to win Jewish votes at home.How dare Jewish votes be courted! Don't they know the only permitted position is to adopt policies on Israel in order to court Arab or Muslim votes?
Funny that he subsequently fails to continue to receive public funds to finance his private endeavour (note the absense of evidence that *all* opportunities to learn English have been frustrated). It's almost as if Kenney suspects it of indoctrinating its wards whilst begging for money from the people it despises.
What an ill-conceived, easily reputable, borderline nasty article.
Incidentially, here is the bodacious Alykhan Velishi (http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dip&pid=108228&tid=108228&ref=rss&eid=30).
Bodacious is the word! She's a stunner all right but I don't think I'll be casting any votes in the Conservative direction.
MM could someone tell me how to highlight quotes? Once I have mastered that, I can make an even greater nuisance of myself.
Thank you
(By the way, this is a terrific thread...)
I'm not sure you should be asking Melancholy Man how to quote posts, he has a habit of quoting them without attribution.
It's all explained here (http://forum.caithness.org/misc.php?do=bbcode#quote).
Firstly the Toronto Star has it's own agenda and I am sure that Jason Kenny the Immigration Minister doesn't jump up and make a decision. He is the spokesperson...Political Beak....for the Gov't!
Should we or should we not allow people into Canada who do nothing but stir things up. We recently had serious problems in Toronto and in Quebec over Religious and like issues......Someone somewhere has to make it stop. If not we will be like those Countries that kill each other!!!!!!!
Food for thought!!!!!!& Without Prejudice ....as you are also a Canadian.. Cost me twelve bucks!!!
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 22:54
Drink Canada dry!
Sandy, if that Toronto Star report was indicative of the journalistic talents of the newspaper, let alone the faux liberal Canadian press, I pity the country. It was a disgrace and, under this country's libel laws which Galloway makes full use of (except when he's being reported to have purchased infrastructure in the planning of the murders of hundreds of ordinary Kenyan workers) and which it congratulates, could be ripped to shreds by Kenney's office.
I say faux liberal because it ain't Liberal. Harper is closer to classical Liberalism, just as is that adorable Ignatieff and, even, our M.P. Not so with the puritans with Iraq and Jew fixations, who squeal about their comforts but quickly drag dissenters before the kangaroo courts of the erroneously named Canadian Human Rights Commission.
Bodacious is the word! She's a stunner all right but I don't think I'll be casting any votes in the Conservative direction.
I think you're looking at the wrong person. Velishi is a he-person and found about halfway down.
Back to Galloway. Here (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jOjOUnorBs-cH0fNOpyL0WxZ3DQA) is what he said:
Galloway said he personally would be donating three cars and 25,000 pounds (35,000 dollars) to Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniya as he dared the West to try to prosecute him for aiding what it considers a terror group.
“I say now to the British and European governments, if you want to take me to court I promise you there is no jury in all of Britain who will convict me. They will convict you.”
Galloway made the announcement at an outdoor conference in the presence of several senior Hamas officials, and his words were greeted by shouts of “Allahu Akbar!” (God is Great).The Canadian Foreign Office appears to have said, okay, then. Get to France, but you ain't coming in here. Once more:
I say now to the British and European governments, if you want to take me to court I promise you there is no jury in all of Britain who will convict me. They will convict you.This sounds like a wannabe gangster hood threatening perhaps the last remaining truly representative body, i.e. criminal juries, into submission.
Quite disgraceful from a so-called Leftist, parliamentarian, human being.
Hamas is proscribed in this country as well. I really would hate an M.P. to ask, under parlimentary immunity, why a British citizen who openly boasts of donating money and materials to its political leaders and who has been barred from entry to one of the most stable Commonwealth countries for that reason is not being investigated by the Westminster avenues or, even, Police.
That'll be terrible.
And, just in case anyone still argues that Hamas is just another political group, have a look at what's enshrined in its founding charter:
ARTICLE SEVEN
The Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to implement Allah’s promise, whatever time that may take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: “The Day of Judgment will not come about until the Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them), until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: Oh Muslim! Oh Abdullah!, there is a Jew behind me, come on and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews.
This virulent racism at it's most naked, and a call to genocide. For reasons such as this, and Hamas' active targeting of Israeli civilians, it is considered a terrorist organization. Note, it doesn't kill civilians as part of 'collateral damage' but a deliberate policy, including children which representatives have justified as "future soldiers" (i.e. that they, as a whole, share the guilt for being Jewish).
Can someone please tell me why such and organization should be engaged with, and not for hellfire missiles to be directed at the heads of its big cheeses?
I guess I am taking a rather simplistic view of the whole situation/s.
I have been in Canada for approx 36 years and we seem to be...mostly...on an even keel without the fighting/ demonstrating/ violence/ and general word slagging that I see goes on elsewhere.
So my opinion is simply ''Let's just keep doing what we have been doing". 'Cause it seems to work, and if it means keeping radical people out... I concur.
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 23:08
Canada, hell yeah!
I was present at the violent demonstrations in Grosvenor Square, London, England in the late 60's. Albeit they may have been justified, and I suppose that it was a means to an end...........But.. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh... a peaceful way of life is the way to go.
Melancholy Man
21-Mar-09, 23:17
I was present at the violent demonstrations in Grosvenor Square, London, England in the late 60's.
Protesting against the invasion of Czechoslovakia or the Cultural Revolution? Sorry, couldn't resist that... had I been around at the time, I would have opposed the Vietnam War. I don't loose sight, though, of the 'situationists' who were present and those who didn't just oppose American action, but *supported* Ho, Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh - how many kids did he do in?
Rathered a 'love in' ma sell. Wink wink....nudge nudge!
butterfly
21-Mar-09, 23:55
Geez!What a lengthy debate,am tired oot just reading it!:eek:
But don't you agree with me/ nothin beats it!!
butterfly
22-Mar-09, 01:15
But don't you agree with me/ nothin beats it!!
Whatever floats yer boat!;):lol:
Melancholy Man
22-Mar-09, 01:29
Goodness, I forgot this (http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/comment/columnists/lifestyle-columnists/george-galloway/2008/07/21/brown-s-empty-words-won-t-help-hostages-86908-20656667/) on British hostages (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7516088.stm) in Iraq:
Nor is there any point in the usual “they were only there trying to help ordinary Iraqis” line.
All foreigners - except bone fide journalists - were warned by the resistance from the start to leave.
If they did not they would be treated as mercenary auxiliaries to the occupation and would be killed or kidnapped.
A disgusting person.
Ma boat floats well thank you/ Atlantic Ocean and not in Virtual Reality.....Us Canadian Scots are tough.......and good!
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.